From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coleman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 27, 1999
744 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. 99-1599.

Opinion filed October 27, 1999.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County, Judge John T. Parnham.

Appellant, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and James W. Rogers, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


The trial court summarily denied the defendant's rule 3.850 motion on the ground that the claim asserted in the motion was conclusively refuted by the transcript of the defendant's plea colloquy. However, the transcript was not attached to the order as required by rule 3.850(d). In an appeal from an order summarily denying a postconviction motion, the record consists entirely of "conformed copies of the motion, order, motion for rehearing, and order thereon, and attachments to any of the foregoing." See Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(i). The appellate court does not have access to the full record as it would in a plenary appeal. Because we do not have the transcript purporting to refute the defendant's claim, we must reverse the trial court's summary denial of the motion. On remand, the trial court may attach those portions of the record that conclusively show that the defendant is entitled to no relief, or may conduct an evidentiary hearing. See Cooper v. State, 700 So.2d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).

Reversed.

ERVIN, LAWRENCE and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Coleman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 27, 1999
744 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Coleman v. State

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN WENDELL COLEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Oct 27, 1999

Citations

744 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)